Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah more entitlement in America!
I ~will~ say that I do believe the punishment was harsh..and yeah, it's touching that she did it for the fact of bettering her kids.
However, it was illegal. I'm sorry about where she lives and I'm sorry for her situation.. but.. there are people who have made greater sacrifices and worked harder and are able to live in these better areas where they pay the taxes and send their kids to school. Why should they make the sacrifices and work extra hard..and other people can come in and get in on they are paying for?
So this makes it right to lie and cheat? The OBVIOUS solution in your case too would have been to MOVE into a different district. The reason behind this doesn't make it any more right.
I agree. I teach in a wealthy district but there are apartments and cheaper houses in the district. You may have to buy smaller than you want but if it's schools that are important, you do what you have to.
The argument related to equality is of equal educational opportunity not an equal education. A child with severe disabilities receives much more funding and services than a child without those disabilities. It would be an unequal educational opportunity for the child with disabilities if he/she received an equal education to the one without.
The law calls for equal education opportunity that does not discriminate on race, sex, national origin, etc. Residence is a separate issue.
This case is not a matter of civil rights. It is a case of fraud and gaming the system.
I disagree. The local tax system results in segregation, there is no arguing that.
As for title 20:39 I have no idea why you put up a link regarding esl kids, but whatever floats your boat. But your reference to the ADA from 1990 shows that the EEOA can and has been amended to broaden the protections it provides. And FYI equal education does not mean the same amount of money spent. But even the current ADA's interpretation has shown that separate (SpEd rooms) is not as equal an education as mainstreaming.
There is current legislation being reviewed that would expand EEOA protections to gay students. There are cases in individual states (such as Ohio) regarding the funding and assignment of school districts and their inherent unconstitionality. It is entirely likely that EEOA will be amended some day to require states to fund schools at the state level and address the issue of SES segregation.
I disagree. The local tax system results in segregation, there is no arguing that.
As for title 20:39 I have no idea why you put up a link regarding esl kids, but whatever floats your boat. But your reference to the ADA from 1990 shows that the EEOA can and has been amended to broaden the protections it provides. And FYI equal education does not mean the same amount of money spent. But even the current ADA's interpretation has shown that separate (SpEd rooms) is not as equal an education as mainstreaming.
There is current legislation being reviewed that would expand EEOA protections to gay students. There are cases in individual states (such as Ohio) regarding the funding and assignment of school districts and their inherent unconstitionality. It is entirely likely that EEOA will be amended some day to require states to fund schools at the state level and address the issue of SES segregation.
I fail to see what this has to do with the case in point. You are straying far from the topic at hand.
Quote:
(a) the deliberate segregation by an educational agency of students on the basis of race, color, or national origin among or within schools;
(b) the failure of an educational agency which has formerly practiced such deliberate segregation to take affirmative steps, consistent with part 4 of this subchapter, to remove the vestiges of a dual school system;
(c) the assignment by an educational agency of a student to a school, other than the one closest to his or her place of residence within the school district in which he or she resides, if the assignment results in a greater degree of segregation of students on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin among the schools of such agency than would result if such student were assigned to the school closest to his or her place of residence within the school district of such agency providing the appropriate grade level and type of education for such student;
http://www.maec.org/laws/eeo.html
For some reason, you are spouting nonsense about what 'Equal Education Opportunity' is. The above may enlighten you a bit.
You can twist it any way you please, but the bottom line is, this woman wanted something for nothing and broke the law. She learned from her father to manipulate the system and was doing so until caught. She had ample opportunity to make good on her deception of the district's rules by paying the tuition that district lost by her deception.
There was NOTHING that said that if she paid tuition to that district, her children couldn't remain in that school as others that got caught did. She ignored that as well. She CHOSE to break the law, had the opportunity to make good and CHOSE not to.
In Colorado, as in some other states, I believe, we have open enrollment which allows open enrollment to a school in another district. You are not guaranteed a space, however, and out-of-district students are given last priority in the lottery.
If such is not the case in state where this happened, I agree with those who feel it is not acceptable. However, these people didn't do anything that hadn't been done before. I recall this happening when I was a kid in Pennsylvania, and usually the "remedy" was just to remove the kid from the school and require them to attend their own neighborhood school.
For some reason, you are spouting nonsense about what 'Equal Education Opportunity' is. The above may enlighten you a bit.
EEOA has been amended already twice. In all likelihood it will be again.
Oh and in Ohio their own judges have deemed the current local tax system unconstitutional.
Quote:
You can twist it any way you please, but the bottom line is, this woman wanted something for nothing and broke the law. She learned from her father to manipulate the system and was doing so until caught. She had ample opportunity to make good on her deception of the district's rules by paying the tuition that district lost by her deception.
LOL! I love how people are acting like they know this woman personally. You have no idea whether or not any of the suppositions you have made about her or her father's character is true.
Quote:
There was NOTHING that said that if she paid tuition to that district, her children couldn't remain in that school as others that got caught did. She ignored that as well. She CHOSE to break the law, had the opportunity to make good and CHOSE not to.
Circles and circles. Anyway, she did pay into that school as 40% of all taxes collected in Ohio go towards paying for ALL the schools. There are plenty of examples of unjust laws, this will eventually be proven out as one.
It's very difficult to explain rational thinking to someone with a very hard head. Blindness and narrow thinking is not what built this nation, so it's just as well to leave the cavedweller in the cave.
The woman broke the law. Period. She has been punished and life goes on. The children are no longer in the school. Now she should do things properly and give them a fresh start.
So what happens if you can afford them until your husband or wife has a midlife crisis and dumps you?
What if you could afford them while you stayed at home with your kids, and upon being dumped realized you have years of relative blue sky on your resume and need to go back to school? Wait! Does this mean that I get to defraud the government for welfare benefits? Does this justify my shlepping my kid off to a better school in a different town while I pay less for subsidized housing? No. It doesn't regardless.
What if you could afford them until your company decided to outsource your job?
What if you could afford them until you got cancer and your treatments left you penniless AND without a job?
What if you could afford them until one of them became sick and required extensive medical treatment?
What then?
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
OK, I guess I need to make explicit the conditions I thought were implied in my original statement: Don't have kids knowing you can't afford them and don't intend to do anything to support them besides defrauding people. Is that clear enough for you?
No way. I'm going broke with the insane property taxes (over half of which goes to schools) that get approved without discussion by the legislators at every Town Meeting. Parents want to think that the more money you throw at education, the "better" the education. Actually, the Federal Gov't did a major study when I was young trying to prove this, and the results proved the opposite: student achievement is based on the socio-economic class of the parent. So people get confused because areas with high socio-economic levels also tend to spend like drunken sailors on education.
Unfortunately, art classes and music classes and other "fluff" classes are really nice, but they should be the responsibility of the parents to pay for. I was good at art when I was young, but the school system didn't pay for such stuff, so I ended up teaching myself. Achievement in art and music will be a result of natural talent plus how much time you spend practicing--not whether the local taxpayer pays for classes that kids will take because they are much easier and more fun than math.
When local government starts causing retirees and others on fixed incomes to lose the homes they already paid for--as is now happening in NH--we need to stop "rubber stamping" every budget a school system presents. They are going to ask for the sky every time, and we have to stop giving it to them. Schools need to focus on what will help kids succeed in the new "world order," something we obviously continue to fall behind in.
As to getting your kids in an expensive school system while avoiding paying the high taxes, this is theft that ultimately will result in retirees and others being taxed out of their homes.
I personally think that it's admirable that the lil kids were taught to lie and cheat my their momma....she is a shining example
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
